Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34696278›Full record

ArticleVaccines2021

Cognitive Factors Influencing COVID-19 Vaccination Intentions: An Application of the Protection Motivation Theory Using a Probability Community Sample.

Kwok Kit Tong, Mu He, Anise M S Wu, Le Dang, Juliet Honglei Chen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccines, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Predicting COVID-19 booster vaccine intentions.Applied psychology. Health and well-being · 2022
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Kwok Kit TongDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Macau, Macao, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8594-9300
Mu HeDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Macau, Macao, China.
Anise M S WuDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Macau, Macao, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8174-6581
Le DangDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Macau, Macao, China.
Juliet Honglei ChenDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Macau, Macao, China.ORCID 0000-0002-6564-5390
University of Macau · MOPingdingshan University · CN

Funding

Universidade de Macau MYRG2019-00125-FSS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

COVID-19 vaccines have been shown to provide protection against severe disease and death. However, substantial individual differences in vaccination intentions have hindered achieving optimal vaccination rates across the population. To look for efficient strategies to promote vaccination, this study tested whether the protection motivation theory (PMT), a cognitive model based upon threat and coping appraisals, would account for the differences in vaccination intentions under three scenarios (i.e., in the context of getting vaccinated in general, and in the context of high- and low- efficacy for reducing COVID-19 transmission risk). A phone survey was conducted in early 2021 and obtained a probability community sample (

Indexed as

COVID-19intentionprotection motivation theoryvaccine acceptancevaccine efficacy

Identifiers

PMID34696278
PMCPMC8537765
OpenAlexW3205386309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.